The University of Maine system now has recommendations from three distinct groups on what can be done to get rid of the $43 million budget gap projected over the next 4 years.
David Flanagan and his 12–member task force produced a 67–page document that urged Maine’s 7 public universities to cooperate in cost-cutting.
Wow — a recommendation to cooperate. The group must have spent months of bouncing ideas back and forth before coming up with that insightful plan.
Here’s are the tak force’s guiding principles:
1. ESTABLISH A PUBLIC AGENDA
2. ACT AS A UNION AND NOT A CONFEDERATION
3. RESTRUCTURE SYSTEM-WIDE SERVICES
4. USE FINANCIAL POLICY TO REALIZE SYSTEM GOALS
5. START NOW
Talk about revolutionary — I’m just amazed they could waste 67 pages on this drivel of obvious advice.
The chief financial officers came up with their own document of proposals. They include such mind-blowing recommendations as this:
To achieve efficiencies, the seven campuses must work like a System in implementing technology solutions and business processes in order to take advantage of economies of scale.
How long did it take this group to come up with that golden nugget?
Academic leaders drafted a third document of ways to reduce costs, including such things as eliminating classes and majors that only have a few students in them and getting rid of those pesky Microsoft Office products on campus computers and using free stuff from the Internet.
Brilliant concepts — each and every one of them. Who would have thought to get rid of courses or majors with only a few students in them? Genius, I tell you, simply genius.
I’m so delighted these hard working members of the task force, the financial officers and the academics put their combined educational wisdom and good common sense to use incoming up with inconsequential ideas.
But I what to know one thing. Did each of the groups talk to one another and agree that neither of them would make the only recommendation that really makes and sense?
After all, the things that they’re proposing are really just a drop in the bucket. It’s like recommending that you turn down the thermostat in the winter, keep the windows locked shut, and make sure there is plenty of insulation in the attic — while not noticiing that the front and back doors to your house are totally missing.
I can tell you what the University of Maine system needs to do to save money. I don’t need a task force, board meetings, an academic study or months to ponder the question either.
It’s simple.
Close some campuses.
Maine has 7 public university campuses all doing their own thing. That is at least four or five more campuses than what we need.
Want to close the budget gap and do it fast?
Close some campuses.
Get rid of all the needless administration associated with running seven separate entities that have little to do with one another.
Close some campuses.
Hmmm — I wonder how these three separate recommendations could have missed that simple suggestion?
Sounds like a reasonable enough suggestion... but we've been here before. Half a decade ago, UMS was buzzing with a much-hyped plan to merge the campuses at Machias, Fort Kent, and Presque Isle. After much discussion (and some vehement input from the residents of northern and eastern Maine), the plan was modified and the system remained largely the same.
Maine's a relatively small state; why do we need seven campuses? You mentioned that seven campuses is "four or five more campuses than what we need." That would mean, I suppose, that the state should close all campuses (and terminate all campus employees) other than the flagship campus in Orono and the University of Southern Maine. So we'd shutter the University of Maine at Farmington, a campus named one of U.S. News and World Report's best colleges and known as a top-of-the-line school for education? We'd close Machias, with its direct link to the aquaculture and agriculture businesses of Downeast?
The key is that each campus plays an important role within the region it serves. Each school helps educate the residents of the region and helps sustain and develop the unique industries and trades of the area. (Some of the University campuses even attract people to the state from away.)
Accessible education is paramount - especially in an economic climate like the one we face today. Should the message the state of Maine sends to rural areas be, "sure, you can have the opportunity of a valuable secondary education... if you can make it to the nearest campus." Many students contribute to their local economy (and help sustain the livelihood of their region) while they complete their schooling. Should northern Maine be deprived of its college-aged workforce by sending anyone interested in college to Orono?
Personally, I'd much rather learn about forestry or potato sciences in a place where I wouldn't have to spend a half a day driving to a working forest or potato field. By forcing students to leave their local livelihoods, the state of Maine would be sending a dangerous signal and would risk losing advances in sciences particular to rural regions of the state.
Closing campuses would result in three of the greatest fears of Maine coming to light: a reduced workforce, higher unemployment (since the University System is one of the largest employers in the state), and an even steeper rate of students leaving the state to study elsewhere and never return.
Posted by: Justin Russell | July 16, 2009 at 08:05 PM